RealGM

I love Sheed. He is our most talented player, without him, Detroit doesn't win it all in 2004, or have as good of a run as they've had.

Even though he is playing well, he is 33.5 years old, and players start downgrading pretty quickly in thei mid 30s. He has one more year left on his contract, for just under 14mil.

The problem is he will most certainly want an extension at a high salary to cover the rest of his career. So a 4 year extension, above 10mil a year? That's a tough one to sign for Dumars.

On the other hand, Sheed will have a huge trade value. An large expiring deal for one of the games best big men. For any of the "first round and out" teams, Sheed could put them to the next level.

One big factor is how the Pistons do in the playoffs, and how well Sheed does. But if the Pistons don't make it to the ECF, it is "blowup time". If they lose in the ECF, it is time to make at least some changes. If they win the ECF and/or the Finals, then Dumars should keep the team basically the same and we don't need to ponder what to do with Sheed. But, if it is one of the first two scenarios, what do you do with Sheed?

I love it when I answer my own questions

A couple of trade ideas that would get us younger:
Charlotte - sign/trade Okafur
Chicago - Nocioni/Noah/filler
Clippers - Kamen and filler
Milwaukee - Bogut and trash (Simmons?)
New Orleans - Chandler
Phoenix - Amare and trash
Toronto - Bargnani and trash

I honestly don't see Sheed declining all that rapidly. This is a point I made repeatedly over the past few years (usually in relation to Ben).

Traditional defensive bigmen are able to play, and have an impact well into their 30's and sometimes early 40's. Look at players like Deke, Kevin Willis or even Zo. Where as when Ben loses a step he's at a severe physical disadvantage Sheed can lose a step and he's still big.

Make no mistake Sheed IS athletic, but his game is NOT heavily predicated on athleticism. Even as he slows down he'll still be a strong post defender and a capable shooter, which are really his most valuable assets. His minutes might and probably should go down, but I think he'll still be a productive player for a few more years.

Plus he's a great mentor for Amir and I'd love to see those 2 continue to play together. I wouldn't break the bank for the guy, but I don't think we'll need to and I do think Joe will try to extend him.

theBigLip wrote:Milwaukee - Bogut and trash (Simmons?)

Ooooooh. Please, please, please, please, please.

I'm an Aussie and a very long time Pistons fan so I would sooooo love to see this happen. Bogut would be a perfect fit for Joe's type of team. He's unselfish, a true team player and willing to accept any role to win. He is a damn good passer, plays good defence and with a true point guard to feed him in the post he could have the chance to actually utilise his post moves and open the floor up for the Pistons shooters.

But I can't see the Bucks trading him, unfortunately. They've got a crap team and they wouldn't want to trade away their one shining light for this and coming seasons for someone on the decline.

At least, if they had any sense they wouldn't. But it is the Bucks, so you never know.

I agree with Cow, Sheed's game doesn't rely heavily on his athleticism. I'd like to see him finish out his contract and sign an extension that will have him eventually coming off the bench as a sixth man towards the end of his career.

Depends...If we suffer another playoff meltdown, then it's time to start exploring our options in regards to trading 'Sheed in order to pick up another draft pick and a promising young player. Some good trading partners would be Houston, Golden State, Portland and Denver; they are all western fringe teams who could benefit from 'Sheed and would probably be looking to deal.

IDEALLY though, we at least make it to the finals. If that's the case, then I would like to see 'Sheed extended. I agree with Hunter; 'Sheed is the type of player who will remain effective for a long time.

It all depends, really. I'd like to hold onto him as a trading chip, because some team may give up a young big with a lot of potential in exchange for a shot at championship glory i.e. Rasheed. His expiring is also tempting to any rebuilding team. What would be great is if we could trade him midseason, land some nice pieces, then bring him back after the season.

I won't mind extending him either, if he takes a 3-4 year deal (possibly with a team option on the 3rd-4th year), if he's willing to take 8-9 million or less a year. Like mentioned, I see him being a veteran 6th man coming off the bench for us down the road. My real dream would be if he'd resign at the mid-level exception. Unlikely, but it'd be great if it happened.

At the MLE, he would be a steal. If he'd sign a 4 year deal starting at 8 or 9 I'd do that as well. Considering he will make almost 14mil next year, what do you think he's going to ask for, and more importantly, what would he accept? 4 years, 10mil each?

My feeling is that trading his expiring contract would probably be the best thing for the long term, but fortunately/unfortunately we'll have a team that's at least on the outskirts of contending and can't afford to rebuild, even on the fly.

theBigLip wrote:At the MLE, he would be a steal. If he'd sign a 4 year deal starting at 8 or 9 I'd do that as well. Considering he will make almost 14mil next year, what do you think he's going to ask for, and more importantly, what would he accept? 4 years, 10mil each?

Rasheed will be 35 by the start of 09/10 season. At that age, I just don't feel comfortable with Joe signing him to a 4 year $40 million dollar contract. Even though his game doesn't rely much on his athleticism, he is notorious for not taking his off season training very serious, even though he did come into camp in great shape this year. Anyways, who knows how long his body will hold up against continual 82+ game seasons.

Plus, I remember reading about him wanting to retire earlier than most would expect. I think a 2 year $18 million contract would be more realistic. From there he can sign additional one-year contracts until he feels he's had enough.

Hunter wrote:I honestly don't see Sheed declining all that rapidly. This is a point I made repeatedly over the past few years (usually in relation to Ben).

Traditional defensive bigmen are able to play, and have an impact well into their 30's and sometimes early 40's. Look at players like Deke, Kevin Willis or even Zo. Where as when Ben loses a step he's at a severe physical disadvantage Sheed can lose a step and he's still big.

Make no mistake Sheed IS athletic, but his game is NOT heavily predicated on athleticism. Even as he slows down he'll still be a strong post defender and a capable shooter, which are really his most valuable assets. His minutes might and probably should go down, but I think he'll still be a productive player for a few more years.

Plus he's a great mentor for Amir and I'd love to see those 2 continue to play together. I wouldn't break the bank for the guy, but I don't think we'll need to and I do think Joe will try to extend him.

I'm with Hunter here, i say Sheed has atleast another 2 or 3 years left before he starts to decline.

Sheed for 3 years 30 million is the best option for us.

Isn't there something tricky about giving a long-term contract to somebody over 36 yo? Something like if we gave him a 3yr $30M contract, for cap purposes it would be considered a $15M hit the first two years and a zero hit the 3rd year(when he's 36+) or something?

I could see Sheed and Joe D decising to pay it year to year with 1yr $10M deals(though they would automatically have a No-Trade built in per CBA).

Low-Ki wrote:I could see Sheed and Joe D decising to pay it year to year with 1yr $10M deals(though they would automatically have a No-Trade built in per CBA).

I can't. That kind of deal cost Minnesota 3 first rounders.

It all depends on what happens in the playoffs, although I can't imagine who the Pistons could realistically get that would bring as much as Sheed does. I think Dumars will extend him for 2 years, at about $16 to $18 million total.

Two years seems reasonable. If we don't go to the Finals, I do think Joe should at least consider trading him, especially if we can get a good young big in return.

I wouldn't mind an extension, just one which decreases in salary as the years go by, so in like 2011, were paying him equal to the rate of his decline.

What I think?

I think Sheed will be the kind of player that can play at 40, solely off of his skillset. Its not like he's Ben Wallace who survived off of being a physical freak.

He has arguably the best skillset of any PF. Even when he doesn't dominate, he can be crafty.

He's the last person I worry about on this team when it comes to decline.

yeah, I could see them tack on a 2-year extension this summer making it 3 years total remaining on his deal.

Do we believe that Sheed can age gracefully and continually develop into *more* of a C?
If we plan on re-upping him and keeping him at the 5 (with Dice/Amir at the 4 for the next two years and PF Maxiell to be extended soon), the length of his deal will affect if/when we draft/sign a center and who that player is. If we acquire some sort of project, a three-year deal would be fine, for example.

I can't think of a near-contending team with any young bigs that we could get in exchange for Rasheed.
We could get Dalembert from Philadelphia? Jermaine O'Neal?
I don't believe that Milwaukee/Charlotte would trade Bogut/Okafor, but I could be wrong.
I have no interest in any of Seattle's bigs besides Wilcox.
How about Chris Kaman? While I believe he's superior to Rasheed NOW, does LAC?

shags wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



I can't. That kind of deal cost Minnesota 3 first rounders.

It all depends on what happens in the playoffs, although I can't imagine who the Pistons could realistically get that would bring as much as Sheed does. I think Dumars will extend him for 2 years, at about $16 to $18 million total.

That's not what Minnesota did. All I'm talking about doing is signing him to a one year deal, and then after the year is up and if both parties want to extend their relationship then you sign him for another year and so on and so forth. I believe Minnesota got in trouble by having Joe Smith signed to a second deal already, done purposefully to circumvent the salary cap.